The ICJ verdict

Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has justifiably claimed as a victory for Pakistan the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) much-awaited verdict in the case of Kulbhushan Jadhav, an Indian intelligence operative under death sentence in this country on charges of espionage and terrorism. The court has rejected India's plea that the sentence passed by a Pakistani military court be declared in contravention of international law and he be acquitted, released and returned to his country, saying "it is not the conviction and sentence of Jadhav, which are to be regarded as violation of Article 36 of the Vienna Conventions". Nonetheless, it has asked Pakistan to review the death sentence, which is hardly surprising considering that death penalty is banned in most countries for being an anathema to civilized sensibilities. The only argument India won was its request for grant of consular access to its man, against Pakistan's contention that the Geneva Convention was not applicable to cases of espionage and Pakistan, in compliance with the ICJ decision, has announced its intention to allow such access. Predictably, India's failure on all other counts has not stopped New Delhi from declaring its own success.
There is a lot more in the verdict for Pakistan to be contended about. The ICJ has accepted its point that Jadhav was travelling on an authentic Indian passport issued in a fictitious Muslim name, Hussain Mubarak Patel. That lends further credibility to his confessional statement that he was working for Indian intelligence agency, RAW, to carry out terrorism activities on Pakistan's soil. The court ruling not only vindicates Pakistan's position on legal points and facts of the case but also suggests the way forward, which should help it counter India's holier-than-thou attitude. It has noted that "Pakistan acknowledges that the appropriate remedy in the present case would be effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence." Considering that it is not a simple case of espionage- an unforgivable offense in any country - but involves terrorism, it should not be important to punish an individual, the designs of those who used him for instigating and organising acts of terrorism in this country ought to be exposed.
The ICJ has left it to Pakistan to review and reconsider the sentence by means of its own choosing. This offers Islamabad a golden opportunity to lay bare New Delhi's policy of destabilising this country by fomenting terrorism. It must not let this opportunity pass. In its reaction while hailing the verdict, the ISPR pointed out that since Jadhav was arrested red-handed in Pakistan he had to be tried under the Army Act - a procedure similar to the Indian Army Act. The ICJ has also not questioned the military court's conviction of the RAW operative. However, since terrorism is an essential ingredient of India's anti-Pakistan narrative, this is an apt moment to hold a mirror to it and also show the international community its real face through a transparent review process. It should be conducted in a civilian court, and opened to international observers. Pakistan has much to gain and nothing to lose by letting the world see what a serving Indian naval officer was doing when caught in its restive province of Balochistan carrying a genuine Indian passport with a fictitious name.